A Dynamic Approach to Category Sensivity of Coordinang...
36
A Dynamic Approach to Category Sensi4vity of Coordina4ng Construc4ons: The Case of As well as Masaaki FUJI Tokyo University of Marine Science and Technology Dynamic Approach to CS of CCs ICLC 13 July 25, 2015 Masaaki FUJI ([email protected])
Transcript of A Dynamic Approach to Category Sensivity of Coordinang...
ADynamicApproachtoCategorySensi4vityofCoordina4ng
Construc4ons:TheCaseofAswellas
MasaakiFUJITokyoUniversityofMarineScience
andTechnology
DynamicApproachtoCSofCCsICLC13July25,2015MasaakiFUJI([email protected])
TableofContents
1. Introduction 2. Category Sensitivity of As well as 2.1. Coordinator-like Properties of As well as 2.2. Category Sensitivity Puzzle 3. Process-Oriented Approach to Possible Grammars 4. A Dynamic Approach to As well as 5. Towards Resolving the Category Sensitivity Puzzle
from a Dynamic Perspective References DynamicApproachtoCSofCCsICLC13July25,2015MasaakiFUJI([email protected])
IntroducKon
• PROCESS-ORIENTED/DYNAMICAPPROACHTOPOSSIBLEGRAMMARS,or
• DYNAMICMODELOFGRAMMAR,or• DYNAMICCONSTRUCTIONGRAMMAR:– itassumesnon-instantaneousmodeloflanguageacquisiKon,and
– itsbasicelementsoroperandsareform-meaningcomposites
DynamicApproachtoCSofCCsICLC13July25,2015MasaakiFUJI([email protected])
Coordinator-likeProper4esofAswellas(1)
(1)[NP] Gwenhad[fourstewardessestosupervise],aswell as[herownduKesinthefirstclasscabin].(AHA287)
(2)[PP] Keithwasgrateful[forthecoffee]aswellas[forthe break].(AHA293)
(3)[AP] Forneglectedyoungsters,theshiversare [psychological]aswellas[physical].(NT1/1/1984,p.8)
(4)[AdvP] [Intellectually],aswellas[temperamentally],Puvis wasaeunedtoSymbolistideas,thoughhe someKmesrefusedtorecognizethefact.(SA84)
DynamicApproachtoCSofCCsICLC13July25,2015MasaakiFUJI([email protected])
Coordinator-likeProper4esofAswellas(2)
(5)[toVP] Hewasrequired[tolearnbyheartlongchaptersof theBible]aswellas[toreaditthroughaloudfrom beginningtoendaboutonceeveryyear].(VPP153)
(6)[VP] Inthisway,wecan[idenKfyourselveswiththe speaker]aswellas[bethehearer].(IALT53)
(7)[VPing]ButtomeCurrenwas[addressingkeyquesKonsIhad aboutlearning]aswellas[givingmeawholenew domainofquesKonsIhadneverthoughtof].(IALT10)
(8) [VPen] Georgehas[scratchedthewall]aswellas[broken thevase].
DynamicApproachtoCSofCCsICLC13July25,2015MasaakiFUJI([email protected])
Coordinator-likeProper4esofAswellas(3)
Second,asharedconsKtuentcanbe“right-node-raised”outoftheconjuncts.See(9).
(9) TheProtestantReformaKonwas [apoliKcal__i]aswellas[areligious__i] [movement]i.
DynamicApproachtoCSofCCsICLC13July25,2015MasaakiFUJI([email protected])
Coordinator-likeProper4esofAswellas(4)
Finally,theverbformsinthelelandrightconjunctsmustbeofthesameform:(10) Georgehas[VP[-tns]scratchedthewall]as wellas[VP[-tns]{*break/*breaking/broken} thevase].
DynamicApproachtoCSofCCsICLC13July25,2015MasaakiFUJI([email protected])
CategorySensiKvityPuzzle(1)TensedVPs:generallyunacceptable
(11) a.*He[VP[+tns]conKnuedhisownworks]aswell as[VP[+tns]helpedme]. b. ??John[VP[+tns]lookslikeRobertRedford]as wellas[VP[+tns]hasalotofmoney]. [McCawley(1988)] c. *Harriet[VP[+tns]drinksscotch]aswellas [VP[+tns]eatskeylimepie]. [CulicoverandJackendoff(2005)]
DynamicApproachtoCSofCCsICLC13July25,2015MasaakiFUJI([email protected])
CategorySensiKvityPuzzle(2)Clauses:alwaysunacceptable
(12) a. *[SBaskervilleknewFranklin],aswellas [SChaucerloathedCaxton]. [Fiengo(1974:126)] b. *[SThepresidentisincompetent]aswellas [Sthegovernoriscrooked]. [McCawley(1988:299)] c. *Ozziesaid[SHarrietisbeauKful]aswellas [SRickywashandsome]. [CulicoverandJackendoff(2005)]
DynamicApproachtoCSofCCsICLC13July25,2015MasaakiFUJI([email protected])
CategorySensiKvityPuzzle(3)TensedVPs:some4mesacceptable
(13)a. He[VP[+tns]drinksJohnnyWalkerBlackwhenhe’s
homealone]aswellas[VP[+tns]servesittohisguests].(SonofRawFish,p.141)
b. She[VP[+tns]meanswhatshesays]aswellas[VP[+tns]sayswhatshemeans].
c. She[VP[+tns]playsthepiano]aswellas[VP[+tns]singslieder].[HuddlestonandPullum(2002:1316)]
DynamicApproachtoCSofCCsICLC13July25,2015MasaakiFUJI([email protected])
CategorySensiKvityPuzzle(4)TensedVPs:some4mesacceptable
(14)a. However,whenevercharacters[VP[+tns]talk]aswell
as[VP[+tns]act],thereisthepossibilityofredundancyandoverlapbetweenproposiKons. [RemembranceofThingsParsed:Story StructureandRecall,p.123]
b. John[VP[+tns]published__i]aswellas[VP[+tns]printed__i][hisownbooks]i.
DynamicApproachtoCSofCCsICLC13July25,2015MasaakiFUJI([email protected])
CategorySensiKvityPuzzle(5)
(15) CategorySensi@vityPuzzle(CSP) Withrespecttoconjoinability,thesequenceas wellasbehavesasifitisagenuineuniversal coordinatorexcept (i) itfailstoconjointensedclausesand (ii)itgenerallyfailstoconjointensedVPsunless theirconjunctsare‘sufficientlyparallel’(ina certainspecifiedsense).
DynamicApproachtoCSofCCsICLC13July25,2015MasaakiFUJI([email protected])
Process-OrientedApproach(2)
DynamicApproachtoCSofCCsICLC13July25,2015MasaakiFUJI([email protected])
7
assumes that what is innately given is a set of possibly parameterized constraints on the output of
language acquisition.
Two Approaches to Possible Grammars (adapted from Kajita 1990)
!! !!! !!! ------ !!!!! !!! !!!� � !!! !!! !!!!! !!!
(2) Two Basic Approaches (Kajita 2001)
(I) Output-oriented Approach
attempts to characterize “possible adult grammars” exclusively in terms of the properties of
adult grammars themselves
!! must/may have property P. ------------------------------------------------ Format (I)
virtually all the linguistic theories proposed so far
(II) Process-oriented Approach
attempts to characterize “possible next grammars” in terms of the properties of the present
grammar of the language
If !!! has property P, then !!!!! may have property P′, where i ≠ 0. --- Format (II)
P may be a property that does not appear in !!!or, for that matter, in any !!.
“Possible adult grammars”: results of the developmental processes
The fundamental difference between the two approaches just outlined reveals itself most clearly in
how linguistic generalizations are stated. In the dynamic approach, it is possible to state inter-stage
Constraints on Output ✧ intra-stage ✧ stage-specific Output-oriented Approach
to Possible (Adult) Grammars
Constraints on Process ✧ inter-stage ✧ stage-nonspecific Dynamic/Process-oriented Approach
to Possible (Next-stage) Grammars
Process-OrientedApproach(3)
• IassumewithKajita(1997)that“everyprelinguisKcallygivenpropertyoflanguageisactuallyrealizedineverylanguage.”– Evennounsorverbsarelearnedfromexperience,ratherthangivenbeforeexperience.(cf.AccordingtoDavidGil,RiauIndonesianlacksnounsandverbsasdisKnctsyntacKccategories.)
DynamicApproachtoCSofCCsICLC13July25,2015MasaakiFUJI([email protected])
Process-OrientedApproach(4)
• Iassumethatourknowledgeoflanguageatthesteadystateincludesallintermediategrammarsuptothefinalgrammar.– So-calledabbreviatedregisters:• Newspaperheadlines(e.g.,ROYALDOG__ILL),• EverydayconversaKon(e.g.,Coffee,anyone?1),or• MariKmeEnglish(Captain,theTitanic__sinking!).
1)creditedtoMasaruKajita
DynamicApproachtoCSofCCsICLC13July25,2015MasaakiFUJI([email protected])
DynamicApproachtoAswellas(1)
DynamicApproachtoCSofCCsICLC13July25,2015MasaakiFUJI([email protected])
(20) Adult:Haveyougotanyotherthingsthatyoulike toplaywithathomebesidesLego. Child:Um,Heccano.IgotHeccano. Adult:Oh,yeah. Child:Youcanmakelotsofthingsoutof[NPthat] aswellas[NPLego].
DynamicApproachtoAswellas(2)
DynamicApproachtoCSofCCsICLC13July25,2015MasaakiFUJI([email protected])
(21) Adult: Whatwouldyoudoifyouwereaprincess? Child: Iwouldgooutinthegardenandpickflowers.I like[NPflowers]. Adult: Youcangooutinthegardenandpickflowers now,can’tyou?Andyou’renotaprincess.But whatwouldyoudoifyouwereaprincess?You coulddospecialthings,couldn’tyou?What wouldyouliketodoifyouwereaprincess? Child: Well,I’dliketohave[NPsweets]aswell.
DynamicApproachtoAswellas(3)
DynamicApproachtoCSofCCsICLC13July25,2015MasaakiFUJI([email protected])
DynamicApproachtoAswellas(4)
DynamicApproachtoCSofCCsICLC13July25,2015MasaakiFUJI([email protected])
DynamicApproachtoAswellas(5)
DynamicApproachtoCSofCCsICLC13July25,2015MasaakiFUJI([email protected])
ResolvingtheCategorySensiKvityPuzzle(1)
DynamicApproachtoCSofCCsICLC13July25,2015MasaakiFUJI([email protected])
• (26) NP>VP>clause
ResolvingtheCategorySensiKvityPuzzle(2)
DynamicApproachtoCSofCCsICLC13July25,2015MasaakiFUJI([email protected])
ResolvingtheCategorySensiKvityPuzzle(3)
DynamicApproachtoCSofCCsICLC13July25,2015MasaakiFUJI([email protected])
ResolvingtheCategorySensiKvityPuzzle(4)
DynamicApproachtoCSofCCsICLC13July25,2015MasaakiFUJI([email protected])
ResolvingtheCategorySensiKvityPuzzle(5)
DynamicApproachtoCSofCCsICLC13July25,2015MasaakiFUJI([email protected])
ResolvingtheCategorySensiKvityPuzzle(6)
DynamicApproachtoCSofCCsICLC13July25,2015MasaakiFUJI([email protected])
(32) Slobin’s(1985)prototypicalscenes...,Slobinproposedthatmuchofchildren’searlylanguagewasstructuredby(i) theMANIPULATIVEACTIVITYSCENE,inwhichananimate
agentcausesachangeofstateinaninanimatepaKent,and
(ii) theFIGURE/GROUNDSCENEinwhichapersonorobjectmovesalongsomespaKalpath.
(TheOxfordHandbookofCogni@veLinguis@cs,p.1099)
ResolvingtheCategorySensiKvityPuzzle(7)
DynamicApproachtoCSofCCsICLC13July25,2015MasaakiFUJI([email protected])
ResolvingtheCategorySensiKvityPuzzle(8)
DynamicApproachtoCSofCCsICLC13July25,2015MasaakiFUJI([email protected])
(34) ForcesbehindprototypicalcoordinaKon (tentaKve) a)Group-formaKon: fromindividualstoagroupofindividuals: A,B=>{A,B} b)UeeranceintegraKon: fromparataxistoagroupofueerances: [S1];[S2]=>[S1conjS2] (cf.Kajita’srecentlectures)
References(1)
DynamicApproachtoCSofCCsICLC13July25,2015MasaakiFUJI([email protected])
12
References
Culicover, P. W. and R. Jackendoff (2005) Simpler Syntax, Oxford University Press, New York.
Feider, H. (1973) “Comparatives in Early Child Language,” Glossa 7, 3-20.
Fuji, M. (1986) “Giji-tooi-setsuzokushi ni tuite – as well as o Chuushinn ni [On quasi-
coordinators with Special Reference to as well as],” Eigo-kyooiku [English Education], 35.2,
68-70; 35.3, 72-74.
Fawcett, R. P. and M. P. Perkins (1980) Child Language Transcripts 6-12 (4 volumes), Department of
Behavioural and Communication Studies, Polytechnic of Wales.
Haspelmath, M. (2004) “Coordinating Construction: an Overview,” Coordinating Constructions, ed.
by M. Haspelmath, 3-39, John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Huddleston, R. and G. K. Pullum (2002) The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language,
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Kajita, M. (1977) “Towards a Dynamic Model of Syntax,” Studies in English Linguistics 5, 44-76.
Kajita, M. (1983) “Some Derivative Processes in Syntax,” Talk given at Tokyo Circle of English
Linguistics, April 1983, Sophia University.
Kajita, M. (1997) “Some Foundational Postulates for the Dynamic Theories of Language,” Studies in
English Linguistics: A Festschrift for Akira Ota on the Occasion of His Eightieth Birthday,
378-393, Taishukan, Tokyo.
Kajita, M. (2001) “A Dynamic Approach to Linguistic Variation,” Talk given at Tokyo Circle of
English Linguistics, May 2001, Sophia University.
Kono, T. (1984) “Eigo Pretty-koubun ni tsuite [On the Pretty-Construction in English],” Gengo
[Language] 13.5, 108-16.
McCawley, J. D. (1988) The Syntactic Phenomena of English (Second Edition), The University of
Chicago Press, Chicago.
Payne, J. R. (1985) “Complex Phrases and Complex Sentences,” Language Typology and Syntactic
Description: Complex Constructions, ed. by Timothy Shopen, Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge.
Slobin, D. I. (1985) “Crosslinguistic Evidence for the Language-Making Capacity,” The
Crosslinguistic Study of Language Acquisition 2: Theoretical Issues, ed., by D. I. Slobin, 1157-
1249, Lawrence Erlbaum Association, Hillsdale, New Jersey.
References(2)
DynamicApproachtoCSofCCsICLC13July25,2015MasaakiFUJI([email protected])
12
References
Culicover, P. W. and R. Jackendoff (2005) Simpler Syntax, Oxford University Press, New York.
Feider, H. (1973) “Comparatives in Early Child Language,” Glossa 7, 3-20.
Fuji, M. (1986) “Giji-tooi-setsuzokushi ni tuite – as well as o Chuushinn ni [On quasi-
coordinators with Special Reference to as well as],” Eigo-kyooiku [English Education], 35.2,
68-70; 35.3, 72-74.
Fawcett, R. P. and M. P. Perkins (1980) Child Language Transcripts 6-12 (4 volumes), Department of
Behavioural and Communication Studies, Polytechnic of Wales.
Haspelmath, M. (2004) “Coordinating Construction: an Overview,” Coordinating Constructions, ed.
by M. Haspelmath, 3-39, John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Huddleston, R. and G. K. Pullum (2002) The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language,
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Kajita, M. (1977) “Towards a Dynamic Model of Syntax,” Studies in English Linguistics 5, 44-76.
Kajita, M. (1983) “Some Derivative Processes in Syntax,” Talk given at Tokyo Circle of English
Linguistics, April 1983, Sophia University.
Kajita, M. (1997) “Some Foundational Postulates for the Dynamic Theories of Language,” Studies in
English Linguistics: A Festschrift for Akira Ota on the Occasion of His Eightieth Birthday,
378-393, Taishukan, Tokyo.
Kajita, M. (2001) “A Dynamic Approach to Linguistic Variation,” Talk given at Tokyo Circle of
English Linguistics, May 2001, Sophia University.
Kono, T. (1984) “Eigo Pretty-koubun ni tsuite [On the Pretty-Construction in English],” Gengo
[Language] 13.5, 108-16.
McCawley, J. D. (1988) The Syntactic Phenomena of English (Second Edition), The University of
Chicago Press, Chicago.
Payne, J. R. (1985) “Complex Phrases and Complex Sentences,” Language Typology and Syntactic
Description: Complex Constructions, ed. by Timothy Shopen, Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge.
Slobin, D. I. (1985) “Crosslinguistic Evidence for the Language-Making Capacity,” The
Crosslinguistic Study of Language Acquisition 2: Theoretical Issues, ed., by D. I. Slobin, 1157-
1249, Lawrence Erlbaum Association, Hillsdale, New Jersey.
References(3)
DynamicApproachtoCSofCCsICLC13July25,2015MasaakiFUJI([email protected])
12
References
Culicover, P. W. and R. Jackendoff (2005) Simpler Syntax, Oxford University Press, New York.
Feider, H. (1973) “Comparatives in Early Child Language,” Glossa 7, 3-20.
Fuji, M. (1986) “Giji-tooi-setsuzokushi ni tuite – as well as o Chuushinn ni [On quasi-
coordinators with Special Reference to as well as],” Eigo-kyooiku [English Education], 35.2,
68-70; 35.3, 72-74.
Fawcett, R. P. and M. P. Perkins (1980) Child Language Transcripts 6-12 (4 volumes), Department of
Behavioural and Communication Studies, Polytechnic of Wales.
Haspelmath, M. (2004) “Coordinating Construction: an Overview,” Coordinating Constructions, ed.
by M. Haspelmath, 3-39, John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Huddleston, R. and G. K. Pullum (2002) The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language,
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Kajita, M. (1977) “Towards a Dynamic Model of Syntax,” Studies in English Linguistics 5, 44-76.
Kajita, M. (1983) “Some Derivative Processes in Syntax,” Talk given at Tokyo Circle of English
Linguistics, April 1983, Sophia University.
Kajita, M. (1997) “Some Foundational Postulates for the Dynamic Theories of Language,” Studies in
English Linguistics: A Festschrift for Akira Ota on the Occasion of His Eightieth Birthday,
378-393, Taishukan, Tokyo.
Kajita, M. (2001) “A Dynamic Approach to Linguistic Variation,” Talk given at Tokyo Circle of
English Linguistics, May 2001, Sophia University.
Kono, T. (1984) “Eigo Pretty-koubun ni tsuite [On the Pretty-Construction in English],” Gengo
[Language] 13.5, 108-16.
McCawley, J. D. (1988) The Syntactic Phenomena of English (Second Edition), The University of
Chicago Press, Chicago.
Payne, J. R. (1985) “Complex Phrases and Complex Sentences,” Language Typology and Syntactic
Description: Complex Constructions, ed. by Timothy Shopen, Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge.
Slobin, D. I. (1985) “Crosslinguistic Evidence for the Language-Making Capacity,” The
Crosslinguistic Study of Language Acquisition 2: Theoretical Issues, ed., by D. I. Slobin, 1157-
1249, Lawrence Erlbaum Association, Hillsdale, New Jersey.
Thankyou.
DynamicApproachtoCSofCCsICLC13July25,2015MasaakiFUJI([email protected])
• ThankyouforyouraeenKon.
